British
MPs have voted to reject possible military action against the Assad
government in Syria to deter the use of chemical weapons.

A government motion was defeated by 285 to 272, a majority of 13 votes.
Prime Minster David Cameron said it was clear Parliament does not want action and "the government will act accordingly".
It effectively rules out British involvement in any US-led strikes against the Assad regime.
Labour leader Ed Miliband said the vote meant military action
was "off the agenda", and added that MPs had reacted against the prime
minister's "cavalier and reckless" leadership.
The defeat comes as a potential blow to the authority of Mr
Cameron, who had already watered down a government motion proposing
military action, in response to Labour's demands for more evidence of
Assad's guilt.
Labour had seen its own amendment - calling for "compelling" evidence - rejected by MPs by 114 votes.PM 'disappointed'

Analysis

Ross HawkinsPolitical correspondent, BBC News

Backbenchers, and the opposition - not the prime minister - set Britain's foreign policy tonight.
Put more kindly, Parliament expressed its will and the PM listened.
However you think it through, it will take some explaining, not least to the Americans.
People at home and abroad will ask: who is in charge?
Many at Westminster will, of course, be obsessed by what this means in a place where weakness is a sin.
Others will wonder about the consequences for the people of Syria and the Middle East.
And Britain - a country that has agonised about its role in
the world since the Suez crisis - will ask whether it might no longer be
a nation that intervenes.

But - in an unexpected turn of
events - MPs also rejected the government's motion in support of
military action in Syria if it was supported by evidence from United
Nations weapons inspectors, who are investigating claims President
Bashar al-Assad's regime had used chemical weapons against civilians.

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond confirmed that Britain would
not be involved in any military action against the Assad regime - but
said it would probably go ahead in any case.
"I expect that the US and other countries will continue to look at responses to the chemical attack.
"They will be disappointed that Britain will not be involved.
I don't expect that the lack of British participation will stop any
action."
He said he and the prime minister were "disappointed" with
the result of the Commons vote which he said would harm Britain's
relationship with Washington.
"It's certainly going to place some strain on the special relationship.
"The Americans understand the Parliamentary process. Perhaps they have been surprised by the scale of opposition."Iraq 'poisoned the well'
Mr Hammond came under fire earlier for claiming Ed Miliband
had given "succour" to the Assad regime by refusing to back Mr Cameron
Asked if all the MPs who voted against the government had
given succour to President Assad, he said "The word was put in my mouth.
The Assad regime is going to be a little bit less uncomfortable tonight
as a result of this vote in parliament."

The moment when it was announced the government's motion had been defeated

He blamed the 2003 Iraq war for "poisoning the well" of public
opinion against British military interventions in the Middle East.
But Labour's shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander said
the government defeat was down to the "fatally flawed" case put to MPs
by Mr Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, claiming the pair's
credibility was now "diminished".
But shadow defence secretary Jim Murphy said: "Parliament is
entirely unpredictable sometimes and I don't think many people saw this
coming."
He said so many of Mr Cameron's own MPs had voted with Labour because they were now "unwilling to take him at his word".
Conservative rebel Douglas Carswell said: "There is not now
going to be British military involvement in Syria, but that is a good
thing, the system works."
Leading Tory rebel John Baron said he was also "pleased the prime minister has listened" to Parliament.